Jeffersonians Vs. Jacksonians Essay, Research Paper

The Washington administration was the first to bring together in the

cabinet of the United States, the Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and the

Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson and Hamilton began to

take different views when the government began to address the issue of the

old war debts and the worthless paper money left over from the days of the

Confederation. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the

Bank of the United States, which would be a public-private partnership with

both government and private investors. The Bank of the United States was to

handle the government?s banking needs. Jefferson protested because this was

not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and

stated that the Constitution?s writers could not have predicted the need of

a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank

of the United States was stated in the ?elastic? or the ?necessary and

proper? clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to

pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. ? This began the

argument between the ?strict constructionists? (Jefferson) who believed in

the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond

its clearly expressed provisions, and the ?loose constructionists?

(Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it

said?. Hamilton and Jefferson began to disagree more and more. Hamilton wrote

nasty anonymous articles in John Fenno?s Gazette of the United States and

Jefferson responded to him in Philip Freneau?s National Gazette. Jefferson?s

Notes of the State of Virginia in 1787 stated that rural life was beneficial

to the government because cities and other areas of large population created

poverty, disease, and corruption. Jefferson believed that the small farmers

where the backbone of the United States. While in the Report on Manufactures

of 1791,Hamilton stated that the government should be used to develop cities,

industries, and trade Hamilton believed that ?government’s function is to

maintain order in a potentially chaotic society. It needs to be remote and

secure from the people’s emotional uprisings?.Jefferson believed the

government ?needs to be limited in its powers and completely responsive to

the needs and desires of the people?.Hamilton was strongest among merchants

in the cities and throughout New England while Jefferson was strongest among

artisans in the cities and throughout the South. These conflicting views

would develop in two political parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and

the Democratic-Republicans led by Jefferson. Although both political parties

presented enticing aspects, Hamilton?s views would be the more reasonable

because Jefferson?s views were idealistic and too strict in reference to the

constitution.

The Jeffersonian beliefs were extremely idealistic. Jeffersonians?

supported a country of farmers which in theory would end famine and the

spread of disease that was commonly found in cities. However, without the

development of cities and industries there would not be a trade industry

which would allow the farmers to trade and prosper. With no trade, farmers

would not be able to market their surplus and the surplus in the American

economy would cause prices to fall. This situation would produce little

profit for farmers and eventually an stagnant economy. An economy totally

based on farming would also encounter problems if droughts and other natural

disasters interfered with their harvests. The Hamiltonian belief is more

realistic. Hamiltonians? supported the expansion of economic endeavors in

cities, in areas such as trade and other crafts. This would help keep the

economy stable and growing if the farming lands were not up to their

potential. Jefferson?s belief that the decisions in government should be

made by the people is very unrealistic and perhaps even naive. It is

sometimes human nature to change one?s views and beliefs in a wince and

citizens might follow the views of an irrational and incompetent person which

would lead the country to ruin. Hamilton said that some of the power should

be kept out of the hand of the people in order to protect the people from

making a change in government that would cause possible disasters.

Jefferson?s view would only would have worked in an perfect world.

Jefferson?s ideals for the government were too strict as it pertains to

the interpretation of the Constitution. Jefferson did not realize that the

Constitution was written in a broad manner. The Constitution was written in

such a broad way that not the laws, but the interpretation of them would

change according to the times. The interpretation was for the government of

turn to recognize what the laws are and to enforce them. The Constitution

called for freedom of speech, religion, and press. It only applied at the

time to white males while in the present it applies to men and women of all

races. Jefferson?s ?strict constructionism? would have led to the downfall

of the government because the Constitution does not have the denotative

solution for every problem that the government would have encountered.

Hamilton?s view that the Constitution could not have anticipated the details

to deal with different crises, and that a wide interpretation of the

Constitution was necessary in order to carry out the government?s duties.

The Hamiltonian views were much more effective in dealing with the

government. The Hamiltonian broad interpretation ensured that the

Constitution is not considered as a 200 year old body of rigid and inflexible

laws, that make no room for improvement in an ever changing American

society.The Washington administration was the first to bring together in the

cabinet of the United States, the Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and the

Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson and Hamilton began to

take different views when the government began to address the issue of the

old war debts and the worthless paper money left over from the days of the

Confederation. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the

Bank of the United States, which would be a public-private partnership with

both government and private investors. The Bank of the United States was to

handle the government?s banking needs. Jefferson protested because this was

not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and

stated that the Constitution?s writers could not have predicted the need of

a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank

of the United States was stated in the ?elastic? or the ?necessary and

proper? clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to

pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. ? This began the

argument between the ?strict constructionists? (Jefferson) who believed in

the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond

its clearly expressed provisions, and the ?loose constructionists?

(Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it

said?. Hamilton and Jefferson began to disagree more and more. Hamilton wrote

nasty anonymous articles in John Fenno?s Gazette of the United States and

Jefferson responded to him in Philip Freneau?s National Gazette..

Jefferson?s Notes of the State of Virginia in 1787 stated that rural life

was beneficial to the government because cities and other areas of large

population created poverty, disease, and corruption. Jefferson believed that

the small farmers where the backbone of the United States. While in the

Report on Manufactures of 1791,Hamilton stated that the government should be

used to develop cities, industries, and trade Hamilton believed that

?government’s function is to maintain order in a potentially chaotic society.

It needs to be remote and secure from the people’s emotional

uprisings?.Jefferson believed the government ?needs to be limited in its

powers and completely responsive to the needs and desires of the

people?.Hamilton was strongest among merchants in the cities and throughout

New England while Jefferson was strongest among artisans in the cities and

throughout the South. These conflicting views would develop in two political

parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led

by Jefferson. Although both political parties presented enticing aspects,

Hamilton?s views would be the more reasonable because Jefferson?s views were

idealistic and too strict in reference to the constitution.

The Jeffersonian beliefs were extremely idealistic. Jeffersonians?

supported a country of farmers which in theory would end famine and the

spread of disease that was commonly found in cities. However, without the

development of cities and industries there would not be a trade industry

which would allow the farmers to trade and prosper. With no trade, farmers

would not be able to market their surplus and the surplus in the American

economy would cause prices to fall. This situation would produce little

profit for farmers and eventually an stagnant economy. An economy totally

based on farming would also encounter problems if droughts and other natural

disasters interfered with their harvests. The Hamiltonian belief is more

realistic. Hamiltonians? supported the expansion of economic endeavors in

cities, in areas such as trade and other crafts. This would help keep the

economy stable and growing if the farming lands were not up to their

potential. Jefferson?s belief that the decisions in government should be

made by the people is very unrealistic and perhaps even naive. It is

sometimes human nature to change one?s views and beliefs in a wince and

citizens might follow the views of an irrational and incompetent person which

would lead the country to ruin. Hamilton said that some of the power should

be kept out of the hand of the people in order to protect the people from

making a change in government that would cause possible disasters.

Jefferson?s view would only would have worked in an perfect world.

Jefferson?s ideals for the government were too strict as it pertains to

the interpretation of the Constitution. Jefferson did not realize that the

Constitution was written in a broad manner. The Constitution was written in

such a broad way that not the laws, but the interpretation of them would

change according to the times. The interpretation was for the government of

turn to recognize what the laws are and to enforce them. The Constitution

called for freedom of speech, religion, and press. It only applied at the

time to white males while in the present it applies to men and women of all

races. Jefferson?s ?strict constructionism? would have led to the downfall

of the government because the Constitution does not have the denotative

solution for every problem that the government would have encountered.

Hamilton?s view that the Constitution could not have anticipated the details

to deal with different crises, and that a wide interpretation of the

Constitution was necessary in order to carry out the government?s duties.

The Hamiltonian views were much more effective in dealing with the

government. The Hamiltonian broad interpretation ensured that the

Constitution is not considered as a 200 year old body of rigid and

inflexible laws, that make no room for improvement in an ever changing

American society.